The Wizard of Oz, The Musical

November 23 to December 31, 2011

Martha Cohen Theatre

http://www.atplive.com/The-Shows/TheWizardOfOz/index.html

Listen to my live review of The Wizard of Oz on CBC Radio’s Eyeopener on Monday, November 28th at 7:45 am

 http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/

 

Going to see The Wizard of Oz you expect certain things. A twister and Munchkins and red ruby slippers plus witches and wizards and yellow brick roads. And of course let’s not forget the lions and tigers and bears, oh my! But last night I encountered something totally unique at Alberta Theatre Projects’ holiday production of Oz. I met a woman, Canadian born with adult children, who had never seen The Wizard of Oz. Never read the book, never seen the movie and never been to the play. An Oz virgin! It felt like a precious rare discovery in a theatre full of people who, like myself, could hum along with every song and knew the lines before they were spoken.

So, what would I have thought if I were her?  Or if not her specifically, someone who was new to the story and production. First I would have thought that The Wizard of Oz is a funny gag a minute comedy verging on farce at times. Second I would have wondered why the silly Wicked Witch of the West is such an enduring force of evil in our cultural collective. And third I would have to scratch my head about audiences’ devotion to the character of Dorothy. This is not to say I wouldn’t have enjoyed the play.  I would have to a point. But for this kind of production, the enjoyment really comes from seeing the familiar yet once again. Comparing it to your memories of the movie and seeing where it stacked up. Even perhaps forgiving the production for what it can’t do because you can fill in the blanks yourself. All of this was possible to a greater or lesser degree as the play wobbled between a wonderful reinvention of the movie version to an efficient yet uninspired and sometimes off-putting delivery of the classic.

But back to the imagined Oz virgin’s critique to begin. The Wizard of Oz has always had humorous moments but I was unprepared for the joke-fest treatment this production presented. I can’t think of a single scene that didn’t play for laughs in one way or another by either mugging up the known funny bits, or introducing new elements sure to make the audience giggle. When it worked well, it was wonderful – the Lion’s reference to his father holding him up overlooking the valley a la Lion King and the hysterically funny and smartly creative Munchkin scenes. But at other times it seemed like the comedy was misplaced and trying too hard, especially when it came to the Wicked Witch of the West who instead of evil with a side of scary was portrayed as campy with a penchant for one-liners. I appreciate that this is a family show and that the scare-factor had to be kept at a minimum, but to dumb down the Wicked Witch into a spoof of herself felt wrong to me and didn’t provide the full villain experience the story calls for.

And what of Dorothy and the filling of Judy Garland’s ruby slippers in the role? No doubt this is a daunting task for any actress and while it may be impossible to live up to the legend, Ksenia Thurgood’s Dorothy was wanting not just in relation to Garland, but of its own accord. Right from the first few lines of “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” Thurgood’s voice came across as thin and unsuited for the task. In ensemble singing she was easily overpowered and solo had a hard time rising above the music. Her acting was not much stronger with her energies seemingly focused on providing annoyingly enunciated diction and exaggerated crisp consonants.  “Oh ToTo, I keep forgeTTing we are noT in Kansas anymore!”  It made Dorothy sound formal and cardboard and was an impediment to ever really liking her the way I wanted to.

Thankfully this was not a problem with her trio of friends.  The actors playing the Scarecrow, the Tin Man and the Lion had similarly large shoes to fill and they did so impressively.  Kevin Corey’s Lion was lovable and funny and David Leyshon’s Tin Man broke our hearts when he finally got his. But it was Bruce Horak’s Scarecrow that lit up the stage. From his perfectly rubbery physicality to his naively sage delivery and his resonant singing voice, Horack nailed every turn and gave the audience the perfect Scarecrow.

But the actors aren’t the only thing that makes or breaks the story of Oz. The sets, the effects and the magic are as much the stars of the show as the characters themselves and are a huge challenge to bring to the stage. Director Glynis Leyshon and her team of set, lighting, production and costume design handled the challenge admirably and gave us twisters and flying and Munchkins and melting and yellow brick roads that combined high-tech film and old-fashioned trap doors to create a manageable spectacle. When Glinda the Good Witch first appeared with her hundred foot high dress lit from within I heard a little girl behind me whisper, “Wow!”  Given the constraints of a small theatre and what Leyshon accomplished I have to agree.

As I was leaving the theatre and weighing the strengths and weaknesses of the play I couldn’t help but focus on the lovely bits and let what disappointed slide. Perhaps because the Scarecrow and the Munchkins and the joy of an adorable live Toto were overwhelmingly enchanting. Or maybe because I can’t bear to have my memory of The Wizard of Oz tainted with negative thoughts. But either way I did notice I was humming “Ding Dong, The Witch is Dead” on the drive home.

RATING

For the kids – Not too scary with lots to laugh at. But be warned, 2.5 hours in total might be a little long for the really young ones. SEE IT

For the adults – Nostalgia factor is high but devotees might be miffed at the differences. MAYBE SEE IT

For the occasional audience – A fun, easy, familiar night in the theatre with lots of sparkle. SEE IT

For the theatre junkie – Despite some great performances and interesting staging there is nothing so compelling that you need to revisit. SKIP IT

Any Night

Nov 16 to 26, 2011

Pumphouse Theatre

http://www.sagetheatre.com/

Listen to my live review of Any Night on this morning’s Calgary Eyeopener 

http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/columnists/theatre/2011/11/17/theatre-review—any-night/

 

The latest play from the Dual Minds duo of Daniel Arnold and Medina Hahn takes on the vulnerable and sometimes disturbed state of sleep and asks us to imagine what it would be like to be watched as we slumbered, either aware of the prying eyes or ignorant to the fact. Any Night is a creepy love story/thriller inspired by true stories that plays more like a contemporary film than a traditional stage play.

This is fitting because in addition to the show’s critical runs Off Broadway, Toronto and Vancouver, the play is in the early stages of being made into a film with the assistance of Movie Central and BC Film. This kind of attention though is nothing new for the playwrights who have already amassed a long list of accolades including  the Alberta Theatre Projects Emerging Artist Scholarship and the protégé award of The Siminovitch Prize, Canada’s most prestigious theatre awards.

The story opens with Anna, played by Hahn, who moves into a basement apartment after breaking up with her clingy and stalker-like boyfriend. Her upstairs neighbour Patrick, played by Arnold, is a nerdy, tech savvy seemingly sweet guy who takes an immediate interest in her and goes above and beyond to make Anna feel comfortable in her new home.  But the domestic bliss is shattered right on the first night as Anna suffers violent night terrors and a disturbing sleepwalking episode. Amazingly though, as if knowing exactly what she needs, Patrick comes to her rescue and makes light of the situation. Anna feels comfortable enough to tell him about her long history of sleep disorders and lets on that she’s even spent time in hospital under observation to try to help diagnose and cure the condition. Patrick doesn’t seems phased by this at all and peruses her until a romance blooms between them. But something isn’t quite right. Anna starts to sense that maybe she knows Patrick from somewhere and that maybe she’s being watched. The stress of all of this makes her nightly problems even worse and her paranoia senses overload until the situation explodes and she finally exposes what Patrick is really up to.

Without giving away all the plot twists and turns (it is a thriller after all) it’s interesting to note the real life events that inspired the play. The first story that motivated the playwrights was the real-life account of Kenneth Parks, who made legal history 1987 when he got up in the middle of the night, drove to his in-laws, murdered his mother-in-law, then woke up on drive home with blood all over him and a knife in his hand. Parks was found not guilty due to sleepwalking. The second story they looked at was about a man who used hidden cameras spy on the young woman living in the basement apartment of his home. The playwrights say they were fascinated by these stories and even visited sleep labs to learn more about night terrors and sleepwalking and to get a handle on just how much we don’t know about our sleep world.

The result is a very unique and extremely unusual play. Not just because of the subject matter, which is interesting in itself, but mostly because of the way the story is told. There are flashbacks and dream sequences and repetitive speeches that give a kind of otherworldly trance-like feel to a lot of the action evocative of  films like Memento or David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive. We’re given answers to questions we don’t even know to ask yet and frankly the audience spends a lot of the play stuck between confusion about what’s going on and interested determination to figure things out. The reason we hang in there, is that Arnold and Hahn’s writing is really clean, their acting is compelling and Ron Jenkins’ direction makes great use of a small stage and just a few props.

The only flaw for me, and it’s a minor one, is that I felt the play was just a tad too long. Any Night is a one-act 80 minute show, which is good because the narrative plays stronger here without interruption. But some scenes verged towards the ponderous, the karaoke scene in particular, and the whole thing could have benefitted from about a 10 minute edit or so. A small quibble however and certainly nothing that takes away from the overall experience of this creative and well-crafted production.

RATING

For the guys – A psychological thriller with some very cool sleep science thrown in. SEE IT

For the girls – Your empathy/sympathy with Anna will leave you both suffocated and angry. SEE IT

For the occasional theatre audience – Non-linear storytelling and a plot that’s hard to follow. SKIP IT

For the theatre junkie – It’s a play you will still be thinking about the next day. SEE IT

Pagliacci / Gianni Schicchi

Nov 12, 16 and 18, 2011

Jubilee Auditorium

http://www.calgaryopera.com/

I like short operas. Granted, they don’t have the hefty pent-up emotion that a 3 hour production can muster nor do they generally have the grandiose staging or whirlwind scene changes. But what they might lack in emotional and aesthetic opulence, they make up for in tightly realized libretto, snappy direction and an easily digestible plot. Or at least the good ones do.

Calgary Opera opens its 40th Anniversary season with two very good short operas, the tragedy Pagliacci by Ruggero Leoncavallo and Giacomo Puccini’s comedy Gianni Schicchi. Both are given decent treatment by the company, but it’s Puccini’s comedy where things really shine and the audience gets not just a “staging” of a classic, but a uniquely clever and immensely enjoyable interpretation of one.

The evening begins with Pagliacci, the story of spousal betrayal and revenge.  Canio, the head of a troupe of clown performers, brings his show to Calabria and invites the villagers to come out that evening to attend the show. With his PR duties finished, Canio and one of his actors, Beppe decide to go into town to have a drink and relax. One of the townspeople jokes that while Canio is gone, his wife Nedda will be wooed by Tonio, an actor who plays lovesick to her on stage. Canio forcefully insists that while this type of flirting goes on as part of his act, he will not tolerate any hint of adultery in real life.

But of course Nedda does have a lover, not Tonio, but a man named Silvio who begs her to run away with him. Tonio sees the two together and, acting in vengeance because he is truly in love with Nedda who has recently rebuffed him, goes to tell Canio and brings him to catch Nedda with her lover. Canio sees the pair, but Silvio runs off before Canio can tell who it is. He threatens to kill Nedda unless she tells him who her lover is, but she refuses. Tonio then tells Canio he must pretend to succeed – if he goes on with the show like nothing is wrong, no doubt Nedda’s lover will come out to watch and then be revealed. Canio grudgingly goes along with this advice but is tortured by the decision vacillating between rage and despair at the betrayal.

The comedic play goes on, but Canio cannot control his anger. He demands onstage that Nedda tell him the truth while the village audience thinks that the violent fight is simply part of the play. Furious by her unwillingness to come clean, Canio stabs her and then her lover Silvio who rushes from the audience to help her. Canio then announces to the shocked villagers that the comedy is ended.

Marc Hervieux’s Canio is musically proficient and he delivers the famous aria “Vesti la giubba” where Canio laments that in spite of his anguish the show must go on with technical poise, but it felt fairly emotionally flat and rushed to me.  Hervieux had all the despair bells and whistles under his command (the crying and the flinging of props) but perhaps by virtue of his launching into the aria too quickly and not giving the emotion enough space, he took what is arguably the most moving arias of all time and underwhelmed. Better direction by Alain Gauthier could have improved this much-anticipated scene. The same can be said for the final words spoken by Canio. At the end of all his torment, when he has killed his wife and her lover and has exhausted his rage, Hervieux gives a forceful bleat of “the comedy is over” instead treating the line like a fatigued and beaten man. The choice makes for an abrupt rather than tragic ending.

Nedda played by Sally Dibblee on the other hand not only musically conquers her role but also provides a solid actorly performance that is a pleasure to watch. Her ability to go from Nedda the love-struck with Canio to Nedda the mean-spirited dismissing Tonio’s love to Nedda the defiant against Canio’s threats, shows off Dibblee’s acting prowess and brings wonderful dimension to the role.

It would be a stretch to say the performance was uneven. The voices were solid, and for the most part the acting was decent to very good.   Better direction and some breathing room to let the emotion simmer however would have turned this good enough performance into something much better.

Gianni Schicchi by comparison was perfect on every level benefiting from outstanding staging, wonderful vocals, a beautiful interpretation of its signature aria, great use of props and superb acting at a level that we don’t often see in opera.

The story is a simple one. The wealthy Buoso Donati is dying and his greedy relatives gather at his bedside hoping for an inheritance from his will.  One of the relatives, Rinuccio is in love with a country girl Lauretta who his family does not approve of, but they agree to let him marry her if there is enough money. Their clan’s dreams are dashed however when they learn that Donati intends to leave everything to the town monastery. Rinuccio suggests that they consult Lauretta’s father, Gianni Schicchi, a shrew self-made man as surely he can help them figure out what to do. With much beseeching from his daughter, Schicchi agrees the help the Donati clan. He devises a plan to re-write the will with him disguised as the now dead Donati and give the relatives “what they deserve” reminding them that all people involved with the fraud would be dealt with harshly under Florence law. When the time comes to write the will, Schicchi pretending to be Buoso Donati, leaves the bulk of the will to himself to the dismay of the relatives. The opera ends with Rinuccio and Lauretta happily together and Schicchi remarking to the audience how happy his fraud made the lovers and how for this he should be found innocent of any crime.

If the star of an opera can be something other than a performer, than the brilliantly timed and bitingly funny staging in Gianni Schicchi steals the spotlight in all the right ways. Here Alain Gauthier clumps the relatives together in a pack as they move about the stage in full fake morning, deceitful back stabbing and naïve trust. They pull out long handkerchiefs and cry in unison, shrug off their black mourning garb in synchronicity and swirl about Schicchi in a whirlwind guided by masterfully funny choreography and blocking that is rewarded with many laughs from the audience.

Just as rewarding are the vocal performances from this cast. John Fanning as Schicchi projects a casual confidence through his singing that is charismatic and full. Sally Dibblee once again performs brilliantly as Lauretta and delivers an utterly beautiful and surprisingly funny execution of the opera’s famous aria “O mio babbino caro” where Lauretta pleas with her father to help with the will so she can marry Rinuccio. Here the juxtaposition of Dibblee’s breathtaking voice, the emotion of the libretto and the comedic staging of the delivery work in excellent balance and create one of those perfect opera moments.

In fact there is not a weak link in this entire opera. The voices and characterization work in splendid harmony making the whole a beautiful culmination of its parts, the staging and prop use is extremely smart and funny without veering into slapstick and then of course there is the wonderful music and story line that is still just as humorous and relevant today. All this in combination is when an opera performance becomes not just a good short one, but a very good one period.

RATING

For the guys – A tragedy about a man betrayed and a comedy about greedy relatives. Themes you will enjoy regardless if you are an opera lover or not. SEE IT

For the girls – You’ll wonder where the heart wrench went in the tragedy but will laugh so hard in the comedy you won’t mind the lapse. SEE IT

For the occasional audience – Short operas are a good way to introduce yourself to an art form that may have seemed inaccessible to you. Open your mind, read the surtitles to follow along and enjoy two famous operas and be prepared to laugh more than you expected. SEE IT

For the theatre junkie – If you can time it right, skip Pagliacci in spite of Dibblee’s great performance and instead show up for a Gianni Schicchi that will elevate your idea of what an opera can deliver. SEE SOME OF IT

Newyorkland

November 9 to 12, 2011

Theatre Junction

http://www.theatrejunction.com/2011-2012-season/newyorkland/

Newyorkland is a challenge. It is a challenge to describe, a challenge to watch, no doubt a challenge to perform and most certainly a challenge to review.

The performance, and please note this is not a play but rather an “assemblage”, employs almost every multi-media and staged technique to address the subject of police work in 1970’s New York. There is theatrical monologue, film, rap, poetry, music, lighting, silent movement and an industrial set that all work towards painting a picture of the bleak and sometimes desperate realities of street cops struggling with the lives and careers they’ve chosen.

This world premiere piece is the latest work by the New York based theatre company Temporary Distortion, who are known and lauded for their interweaving of theater and cinema to bring audiences a multi-dimensional experience. And while the performance most certainly has many dimensions, the overwhelming feeling is that the sum of its parts is nowhere near greater than the whole of the offering. In other words, parts of this performance work extremely well and many parts fall flat.

Newyorkland presents the first person confessionals of 4 New York Cops who describe the toll that police work has taken on their lives. These nameless characters talk of how “the job” has robbed them of their dreams and pride. One cop, through a film segment, talks about how he came to serve as a matter of principle and higher calling only to find out that the public disdains the police and ridicules him behind his back. Another speaks through a poetry segment about how he cannot sleep anymore or maintain his faith in humanity after what he has witnessed. One sits alone on the stage and phones his mother to tell her everything is ok, only to digress into a deadened emotional description of how the life has changed him. Perhaps the most jarring scene with the most forceful impact comes with the film depiction of a domestic take-down of a man holding his wife hostage at gunpoint. The offender points the gun at his own head, then at his wife’s head, then at the cops trying to talk him down. Eventually one cop tackles him and wrestles he gun away. Instead of the glamorous Hollywood ending we are used to seeing, we are shown the post-drama anxiety and shock the heroic cop suffers in the aftermath.

Each one of these anecdotes are worthwhile on their own, but unfortunately get lessened by the totality of the spectacle. Sounds echoes, lights flash, film flashes incessantly and the constant drone of the police radio can be heard in the background during most of the play. I appreciate that this cacophony is meant to illustrate the sensory overload the characters experience, but it gets in the way of the audience understanding what is being said and communicated. More than once I had to strain to understand what a character was saying over the din and often found myself giving up. And then even when the din went quiet for a moment, the over produced sound of the character’s microphones made following their dialogue a headache with unfortunately little payoff.

Even the cool set with its depiction of 3 separate police station offices/Mad Max industrial decor spaces had its drawbacks. The design was fun to look at but was so difficult to light that often I found I had no idea which cop was talking or who I should be relating to. I suppose since none of them had names and each were representative of a larger issue, figuring out which one was talking really didn’t matter. Still I would have liked to have had better lighting direction to help me follow the flow of the performance.

I fared much better with the film portion of the performance. Not only was the narrative clearer in these moments, but they were the most compelling moments. Most everything stimulating that was said or done in this performance was done in film. It’s as though the on stage elements shied away from the challenging or emotional moments of the play and instead let the film do the talking. And while the film segments were well done, I would have preferred more engaging moments on the stage to balance this out.

So back to why this performance was challenging. To describe, Newyorkland is neither a film or a poetry reading or a play per se, but rather a mish-mash of all these things without a comprehensive gelling of any of them. To watch, Newyorkland demanded much from the totality of its audience’s creative senses without satisfying them equally. To review, Newyorkland had some brilliant moments burdened with the weight of an overwrought idea trying to be cleverly all things within too many mediums.

RATING

For the guys – Tough guys have it tough – even 1970’s NYC police. If you can get past the heavy handed artsy element, you’ll like the inside track on what the cops are really thinking as they walk the beat. SEE IT

For the girls – Even with the veil pulled on the tough guy veneer, you may not find the subject matter compelling. SKIP IT

For the occasional audience – No story line…too many mediums. Nothing for you here, move along. SKIP IT

For the theatre junkie – The good moments are very good. Are they worth the entire experience? Not convinced. MAYBE SEE IT

A Behanding in Spokane

Nov 4 to 19, 2011

The Studio at Vertigo Theatre Centre

http://www.groundzerotheatre.ca/

Listen to my live review of A Behanding in Spokane on CBC Radio’s Eyeopener on Monday, November 7th at 8:20 am

 http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/

They say there are 3 types of characters in a Martin McDonagh play – The harmfully wicked, the wickedly foolish and the foolishly clueless. And while A Behanding in Spokane does nothing to expand on this expected repertoire of personality types or their darkly comedic, politically incorrect and violently absurd interactions with one another, the play does deliver the purely twisted enjoyment that comes from seeing a McDonagh piece. It’s an acquired taste that isn’t for everyone, but for those that like it, this show will not disappoint.

The story revolves around a seedy man by the name of  Carmichael who is looking for his hand – literally. Seems that 27 years ago some neighbourhood bullies pinned his arm down on the tracks of an oncoming train that then cut his hand clean off. The bullies picked it up and took off, stopping to wave goodbye to Carmichael with his own hand as they ran away. Ever since then he has been on a quest to find the appendage, not because he thinks he can restore it, but just because it belongs to him. He’s even gone so far as to put ads in the paper offering a reward to anyone who can produce the hand. He’s been presented with many hands over the years, but so far none of them are his.

The play opens with Carmichael sitting in a rundown hotel room where two hapless drug dealing teenagers, Toby and Marilyn, are trying to sell him a bogus hand for $500. It doesn’t take Carmichael long to realize it isn’t his, and he is not happy about it. But before he can kill them both, Toby claims that they have the real hand back at their place. Through no help at all from Marilyn, but some lucky guesses from Toby about what the real hand looks like, Carmichael is convinced that maybe they really do have it. He handcuffs the pair to the hotel radiator, lights a candle in a gas tank that will explode if he isn’t back in 45 minutes and takes off to the house. The fourth and almost wild-card-like character in the play is Mervyn, the hotel receptionist, who keeps budding into the room and the storyline with a bizarre but hysterical naïve stream of consciousness (think Woody from Cheers but not quite as innocent).

McDonagh wrote this play after 911 and it has been suggested that it is an allegory about the US’s quest for vengeance after the attack and their hopeless effort to regain something that is now gone. And sure, you can look at the play through those lenses. But I dare you to do it in real-time for there’s nothing intellectually meaningful or moving on this stage. Instead what we get is deep dark humour and lots of it. The kind where the more gruesome or politically incorrect it gets, the funnier it is. Thankfully not funny just by virtue of shock value, although there is that too. But funny because of the intelligent writing that keeps these characters from descending into mere foul-mouthed, violent sound bites.

Each character at some point gets to move away from the demented action of the play and hold court with a monologue that slows the insanity of the story down somewhat and provides a more thoughtful type of comedic experience. Nowhere is this more enjoyable to watch than Mervyn’s solo scene about halfway into the play where, talking directly to and walking through the audience, he riffs on everything from getting drunk and watching animals in a zoo to lesbianism to school shootings. It’s a theatrical gem that is not only beautifully written, but also superbly acted by Ryan Luhning in a performance that steals the show. But believe me, with three other strong actors in the play, this was not an easy thing to do.

Julie Orton as Marilyn and Edward Ogum as Toby both deliver wonderfully inept characters that maintain the hysteria of the story without going unbelievably over the top. Their interaction as they bicker over everything from their predicament to their own relationship problems is perfectly timed and is responsible for many of the laughs from the audience.

Joel Cochrane as Carmichael quite obviously channels Christopher Walken (who played the role last year on Broadway) and gives us a very satisfying non-Walken – Walken-type performance. I suppose a case could be made that Cochrane was a bit too mimicky and not original enough, but regardless, his acting was solid and his performance the right balance between menacing and quirky.

So in summation, A Behanding in Spokane is full of severed hands,lots of racist/foul language, the imminent threat of violence and perhaps somewhere in there an important metaphor about how we live in a post terrorist attack world.  But if you’ve acquired the taste for McDonagh you’ll find yourself laughing loudly at all of it.

RATING

For the guys – The men in this play are the perfect dark horse anti-archetypes. They are for sure funnier than the heroes and villains you are used to seeing.  SEE IT

For the girls – Ask yourself, do you like sick and twisted humour that doesn’t shy away from violence? MAYBE SEE IT

For the occasional theatre goer – Like I said, it’s an acquired taste. SKIP IT

For the theatre junkies – Classic McDonagh in an American setting. The Walken-like performance may seem too evocative but get over it and just enjoy. SEE IT